TANAJI GULABGIR GOSAVI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
LAWS(BOM)-2019-9-182
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (FROM: AURANGABAD)
Decided on September 30,2019

Tanaji Gulabgir Gosavi Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

SYED AND CO. VS. J & K. [REFERRED TO]
D R RATHNA MURTHY VS. RAMAPPA [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN STATE TPT CORPN. VS. BAJRANG LAL [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Avinash G. Gharote, J. - (1.)For the sake of convenience, the parties are being referred to as they were before the Trial Court.
(2.)This second appeal is filed by the original plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree dated 6th July 2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Shrigonda, in Reg. civil suit No. 23 of 2004, whereby the learned Trial Court has dismissed the suit as filed by the plaintiff claiming a declaration that the plaintiff was the owner of the suit property and perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing his possession over the same, which dismissal has been confirmed by the learned first Appellate Court, vide judgment and decree dated 22nd March, 2011.
(3.)It is the case of the plaintiff that the area admeasuring 2 hectares out of Gat No. 327 situated at village Ruikhel Tal. Shrigonda Dist. Ahmednagar, was received by his father in the year 1945-46 for cultivation under document styled as "Eksalina Karar", since which date his father and after him, the plaintiff is in cultivating possession of the same. It is averred that initially, the land was 10 acres, however, in the year 1967 area of 5 acres was taken away for percolation tank. It is averred that the remaining land of 5 acres is in cultivating possession of the plaintiff, which he has developed, which is demonstrable by the entry in 7/12 extract, wherein the name of the plaintiff is recorded. It is further averred that the plaintiff is in possession of the suit property since last more than 50 years and because of his continuous possession, he has become the owner of the suit property. Since the defendants were trying to disturb his possession, a suit for declaration claiming that the plaintiff had become the owner of the suit property and perpetual injunction against the defendants from obstructing his possession over the same, was filed.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.